# From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org> # # Can someone tell me whether RSA claims to hold process patents or device # patents on RSA public-key crypto? Here's why I'm asking. The relevant statute is 35 USC 271(g):

"Whoever without authority imports into the United States or sells or uses within the United States a product which is made by a process patented in the United States shall be liable as an infringer, if the importation, sale, or use of the product occurs during the term of such process patent. In an action for infringement of a process patent, no remedy may be granted for infringement on account of the noncommercial use or retail sale of a product unless there is no adequate remedy under this title for infringement on account of the importation or other use or sale of that product. A product which is made by a patented process will, for purposes of this title, not be considered to be so made after-- 1) it is materially changed by subsequent processes; or 2) it becomes a trivial and nonessential component of another product." I've got a guy who's telling me that PGP-encrypted communications sent into the U.S.A. from abroad can be stopped at the border as infringing "products," pursuant to this statute. It's relevant to the argument whether RSA claims to hold process patents or product patents. The definitions of "product" and "import" are also relevant. --Mike

Phil writes:

Why should my incoming PGP-encrypted communications be automatically considered "infringing products", since I've got a copy of ViaCrypt PGP that was produced under license from Public Key Partners?

Phil

The statute bars import of infringing products, not use of products. --Mike